Croog Free Vidios Of Couples

On measures to combat fascism and yellow unions

Jorge Dimitrov ________________________________________
First Edition: "IV Congress of the International Association", Moscow, 1928 Scanning: Aritz
Source: J. Dimitrov, Works, Publisher of the PCB, 1953
This Edition: Marxists Internet Archive, year 2001
________________________________________

us

We perfectly realize that fascism is not a local phenomenon, temporary or transitory, but represents a class domination of the bourgeoisie and its capitalist dictatorship in the era of imperialism and social revolution. After the war the victorious imperialist Octube Revolution after the existence of ten years of the Soviet Union under the conditions of the enormous influence of these factors on revolutionary the proletariat, the peasant masses, the oppressed nationalities and colonial towns, the bourgeoisie can not keep for long under the hegemony of class to the masses and tackle the tasks of stabilization and rationalization of capitalism through the old ways and methods parliamentary democracy.

The output for the bourgeoisie is to bring the masses by means of fascism. Fascism is the last phase of class domination of the bourgeoisie. All bourgeois countries spend one after another, sooner or later, to fascism through coups or "peacefully" maa so brutal or "softer" - methods of transition can be diverse and depend on the particulars of the circumstances, social structure and the correlation of class forces and policies in a given country.


The danger of fascism for the proletariat and the labor movement class is permanent and growing danger. The ultimate elimination of that danger is possible only through the overthrow of bourgeois rule, through the replacement of the bourgeois dictatorship of the proletariat dictatorship in alliance with farmworkers. Consider fascism as a temporary and transitory phenomenon, which, within the framework of capitalism, could be replaced by the restoration the old regime &acte; tico-bourgeois democratic and deny the danger of the establishment of fascism in the great capitalist countries be wishful thinking, which can only weaken the monitoring and resistance of the proletariat, serve to help strengthen fascism and temporary fascist dictatorship. These illusions should be rejected in the most resolute, the advocates of Unions are required to carry out an uncompromising struggle against them.

All this is still ma, s true for Southeast Europe (the Balkans, Hungary and others), where a number of particular causes of a historical, economic and political inevitably push the bourgeoisie on the road to fascism. Among these major causes are:
in the Balkans and Hungary has not yet been a bourgeois democratic revolution. The bourgeoisie has not met any of the revolutionary tasks that had emerged as leader of the masses against feudalism and absolutism in the past and had been strongly linked both ideological, as well as politically, with the masses. The farmers have received land through a democratic revolution of the bourgeoisie. Instead, they just fell victim to the most unbridled exploitation and plunder for the accumulation initial capital. Feudalism is not permanently removed. The national question remains unresolved. In most of these countries, the proletariat from the bosom of the peasant masses, is linked to them and from their germination is pervaded by a mood of anti-capitalist opposition.

Balkan countries and Hungary are in a state of semi-imperialism. Primarily agricultural country with a relatively weak industry, which suffers from strong competition from the highly developed capitalist imperialist states. They are in a covert economic war intestine in constant national and territorial conflicts, fueled and exploited by the imperialist states. Their domestic markets are limited to the extreme, due to the freakishly low purchasing power of the masses, while external markets are largely closed to them. Your own chances of stabilizing capitalism and streamline production are very limited. The ravages of imperialist war, the burden of repairs for some of them and the great war debts to all even more difficult economic situation and exacerbate the crisis in their economists.

The imperialist war and its consequences strongly discredited the bourgeoisie to the masses. The gap comes the ruling bourgeoisie and the exploited and oppressed masses became even deeper. In these countries, the bourgeoisie, defending against foreign competition, unlimited exploited the proletariat and pillaged without regard to the peasant masses. After all that imperialist war was practiced in even larger scale. Even with a tough and protracted struggle. This explains the intransigence of the proletariat to the bourgeoisie and the relatively high revolutionary spirit of the masses. From this comes also the weakness of the labor aristocracy and reformism, unlike the imperialist countries, in which the bourgeoisie, drawing on their super profits made in the colonies, managed to create corrupt privileged strata of the proletariat, giving some alms, and turn on their servers direct or indirect. The South East European bourgeoisie is unable, at this moment, to make any kind of serious economic concessions to the workers and the toiling masses, to bridge the deep chasm opened between the two classes.

Due to the similarity between the social structure of old Russia and the Southeast Europe, here is precisely the influence of the October Revolution was and is the strongest and the sympathy of the masses towards the Soviet Union deep .
In such a situation appears clear that the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie can not be sustained through forms of parliamentary democracy, let alone when the bourgeoisie is inevitable and imperative to take extraordinary measures for the stabilization of capitalism, shifting the burden on the working class and peasant masses.

using only the fascist dictatorship of the bourgeoisie can be expected to temporarily maintain its dominance, crushing the resistance of the masses and ensure maximum stability and capitalist rationalization at the expense of such bodies.


The Balkan bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie of the whole South Eastern Europe will inevitably follow that road, also under the pressure of imperialism, primarily in connection with participation in the Balkans and other countries in southeastern preparation imperialist and anti-Soviet war, the decisive condition for which it is essential to suppress, disrupt and weaken the revolutionary movement of the proletariat, the peasantry and the oppressed nations.

But the conditions in the countries of southeast Europe fascism will print a specific character. The peculiarity is that, unlike, for example, fascism in Italy, in those countries is predominantly non-fascism from below by means of a mass movement to its establishment as a state form of government, but rather from above. Apoyádose usurped the state power in the military forces of the bourgeoisie and the financial strength of banks' capital, fascism is committed to penetrate the masses, to create a backup including &oacuet; cal ideological, political and organizational. In Bulgaria, this was done by the military coup of June 9 fascist. In Yugoslavia, the inspirer and organizer of fascism is the block monarchy, military and banking. In Romania and Greece, with minor variations, is following suit. Hungary to face with Horty and Betlán is no exception to this rule. In Austria, and more covertly in Czechoslovakia, fascism is organized, arming and preparing feverishly for a decisive attack on the maximum protection and collaboration of governments themselves "Republicans."

This movement of fascism from above (with the mass of the state apparatus) down to the masses, their most valuable tools are the reformers who, wiping all traces of the class struggle, proclaiming and implementing policy "industrial peace" and binding arbitration, fighting relentlessly against the revolutionary workers' movement, dealing openly fascist positions.
to the rise of fascism, the conquest of the unions, the destruction of the union movement class is a necessity. And dictatorship the proletariat is impossible without the unions, just as the continued existence of the fascist dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is impossible without the subjugation of the proletariat and the peasantry (in one way or another) and above all without crushing the union movement class.

Without renouncing in any way demagogic slogans and to use all methods of corruption, the Southeast European Balkan fascism has, above all, to stand with the application of violence and terror against the proletariat wilder more aware, reaching even the mass slaughter of hundreds and thousands of revolutionary workers, as in Bulgaria and Hungary.

Efforts Main fascism are directed to get their hands on the movement of transport workers, miners and workers of the most important branches of industry, and the movement of employees directly engaged in the state apparatus. Creating all sorts of obstacles to the existence and strengthening of the class organizations of rail, telegraph and postal employees, state employees and miners, etc., Fascism took hold of the reformist organizations and yellow in these branches with active collaboration of the reformers and leaders yellow. In all the Balkan countries and fascism exerted a decisive influence on the direction of existing rail organizations, telegraph and postal employees and state workers and paralyze any attempt to legal organization of the miners.

Great efforts are also devoted fascism to strengthen their influence within the agricultural workers, taking advantage of its great cultural backwardness and the masses of unemployed workers who are hungry. No less attention

fascism dedicated to young workers in agriculture, which tries to capture through various sports and cultural organizations, with the flexibility of a part of that youth, who has not directly experienced the horrors of imperialist war . In

ideological sense, fascism uses mainly the ideas of nationalism and chauvinism, trying to pit against the national workers from other countries, to deceive particularly the unemployed and to divert attention from the masses of the internal problems to external factors, inciting the masses against other peoples, stirring national-chauvinist passions and painting prospects for improving the situation of the working class through the conquest of neighboring territories and regions.

Fascism wields in the foreground the theory of cooperation between capitalists and workers in the field of stabilization and rationalization of production, the theory on the harmony between the classes of common interests between the two, the liquidation of any class struggle and to substitute for compulsory arbitration of strikes, the transformation of unions into organs of the bourgeois state.

Again the reformist leadership of the unions is in full agreement with the ideological and political fascism. In its press spread these ideas, the same policy. The reformist leaders of the railroad and the telegraph and postal employees in Bulgaria are even members of the Fascist organization "Kubrat" and cooperate in the fascist magazine 'Zveno "whose task is to influence ideologically over the proletariat and petty bourgeoisie, especially the labor movement. They also face unique with fascism in the pursuit of class unions, their supporters in the business office and reported to the revolutionary elements, etc. This is already a widespread phenomenon in all Balkan countries and Hungary.

At the same time, using to this end the leaders of some unions, the fascists made enormous efforts to create their own labor groups that would serve them in the crushing strength of unions and organized support class to take all of the trade union movement .

In larger companies are named, for surveillance and security charges, reserve officers fascists and all kinds of items lumpenizados, representing armed groups who terrorize the workers and employees and trying to disrupt and demoralize them, while cleaning companies in the best revolutionary proletarian elements thus, beheaded bodies in enterprises. Rejecting

in general the existence of trade unions legal class of miners, railway workers, dock workers and other important branches of industry, as well as state employees, fascism seeks to limit the trade union movement within the frame class and Professional support of small scale production and other branches of industry, who do not have a decisive meaning for the class struggle.

While fascism at all costs is not to allow the centralization of trade unions in national federations class, trying to dismantling them in local union groups to avoid this so that they can carry out a successful struggle.

Fascism exploits the vocational technical schools for the preparation of new qualified staff, which is under the influence of fascist and can replace the pictures of the revolutionary proletariat of transport and decisive branches of industry.

policy of Fascism with the trade union movement can be expressed the Roman motto "Divide et impera!" Fascism is committed to divide and oppose each other the various categories of the proletariat, the unemployed against the workers, workers of the country against foreign workers, to sow division in the ranks of trade unions in raising organizations Fascists on the ruins of the trade union movement class. Fascism is an enemy determined the restoration of trade union unity and where the trade unions, as in Greece and Hungary, for example, are not yet separated, along with the reformists, work hard for their split.

domination of fascism in the movement esicisión union means the union movement, the destruction of class unions, the suppression of independent trade union movement of the proletariat.
Fascism is the mortal enemy of proletaristas class and trade unions. Fascism must take an uncompromising struggle, ruthless to the end.

There can be any reconciliation between the union movement class and fascism. There should be a single case, no single place where supporters of the Unions march together or in parallel with fascism. And in places where the fascists have not yet reached a definitive agreement and a mutual understanding with the reformist leaderships of unions (eg the Teachers' Union in Bulgaria) and still there is competition among them, the advocates of Unions in the struggle against the reformists and may have nothing in common with the fascists. Mistakes made in this regard by the advocates of Unions in Bulgaria in the organization of the railway and teachers should be avoided at all cost in the future. The struggle against reformism must always be a struggle against fascism and vice versa.

against fascism in the union movement and especially against the fascist unions should be carried out a merciless struggle, tough, ruthless and relentless in all lines and on all fronts. Fascism must be fought in manifest everywhere: in enterprises, establishments, organizations, the media of the unemployed, etc.. - The struggle of concrete and active should be addressed from the point of view of the liberation of the proletariat class and inseparable relationship with the immediate interests of workers and employees, as well as special tasks of the same unions.

This struggle against fascism must be carried out simultaneously in the ideological, political, and organic union movement in the following main directions. First

. Strongly oppose fascist ideology of revolutionary ideology of the proletariat. Unmask and whip up nationalism and chauvinism and theories of "industrial peace" and "harmony of the classes" to settle the class collaboration, all kinds of reformism. Unmasking fascism as a destroyer and gravedigger of the union movement; unmask ideolgía fascism as bank capital and imperialism. Unmasking fascism as a carrier of the danger of war, especially the war against the great Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Broader and tirelessly to popularize among the masses the program and tactics of the International Association, International trade union movement class.

II. Strengthen unions organically class and incorporate into its ranks the masses of unorganized workers. Where it has become impossible the existence of unions legal class (in the case of miners and others), you must create illegal labor groups having relations with the broad masses of workers and to conduct their struggle. Class wing in strengthening the reformist unions, nationalist, self and others and its relationship with trade unions and working class for a common struggle. Broaden and strengthen the network of common workers' committees in enterprises and institutions as organs of the same mass in each location and link their work with the union movement class. Organize the movement of the unemployed and coordinate with the campaigns of class unions. Organize the proletariat of the countryside. Incorporate class ranks of the unions to the huge mass of young workers and women workers. Organize and ensure the protection of workers in all aspects. Third

. Particularly important are the mass campaigns and strikes for increased wages, reduced working hours for labor protection and freedom of organization and strikes, opposing this way (in the process same struggle for immediate demands and interests of workers) to the masses against fascism (and his assistant reformism) and unmask their bourgeois nature traitor. Thus isolating fascism and the fascist unions of the proletarian masses. Fourth

. Ensure the struggle of the workers (in the strikes, etc.) Active support moral and material other bodies of workers in the city and country: to establish the united front of workers and farm workers in close collaboration the workers of industrial enterprises (from the tobacco industry, sugar, etc..) with the small producers of raw materials for companies (producers of snuff, sugar beet, etc..) in their common struggle against capital and isolate the respective industrial Fascism thus these layers of workers, in the process of the same struggle.

Quinta. Organize self-defense against fascist violence in companies (defense organizations, meetings, strikes, labor activists, etc.).. Carry out campaigns to drive business to the agents, guards, spies and provocateurs fascists. Sixth

. Strengthen the campaign from the bottom among the masses against the separatist politics of fascism and reformism, in the process of the same struggle for class unity of the labor movement, without admitting any commitment to the Amsterdam International fascists and trade unions, and fight relentlessly against them.

The fight against fascism in the union movement against the fascist unions should be conducted on an international scale, with the united efforts of the conscious proletariat of all countries. It is particularly necessary to organize international campaigns in defense of class trade unions in countries where it is already set up the fascist dictatorship (Italia, Bulgaria, etc.).. The weakening of fascism in the countries where it occupies a dominant position aliviaráa, no doubt, the fight against fascism offensive trade union movement in those countries where not yet established a fascist dictatorship.
No need to stress that the success of any struggle against fascism in the union movement will depend primarily on the quality of the work of supporters of the International Association of the implementation of a line just by them, to gain the trust of the masses and lead the actions they struggle against the offensive of capital and the danger of war.

But that's impossible to keep the union movement class.



social networking

Cfa Best Financial Calculator

Approaches to Seminar: "Intellectuals, Democracy and Socialism, the Centro Internacional Miranda

Biardeau R. Javier Aporrea
I would begin by quickly with a small quote from the current ambassador to Algeria, Michel Mujica:

"Here we are faced with a dilemma. The alternative is not between capitalism lies in the inequality consubstantiated or a private social democracy. If we resign ourselves to one of two possibilities mentioned above, drown the possibilities of socialist democracy. "(substantive democracy, formal democracy and hegemony in Antonio Gramsci, 1994, p. 51)

Michel Mujica wrote a text that should not be sleeping in the silence of the library, but dwelling should be just discussions of what we call here the "popular constitutional process." It's called "substantive democracy, formal democracy and hegemony by Antonio Gramsci." I somehow wanted to make today a kind of homage to a thesis of this book, because they are very relevant to what we are discussing today, especially for a discussion that I did not perceive from the prospect of a "moralism optimistic", from "self-fulfilling prophecy" that projects that by 2021 we will see the sky and reach the socialist paradise, but just watching and considering that historical processes are subject to the social and political struggles that depend on the historical struggles and social composition of specific classes and, as we say in common sense terms, the "non-pregnant wishes."

I. - We are at a critical juncture
physical If almost all the "theoretical models" are built on the assumption the "vacuum", a "friction-free space" in the historical process we have social and political friction, strife, conflict, antagonism, progress, setbacks, ebbs and flows. And I think that the Bolivarian revolution is living a moment that the intellectual Edgardo Lander scored critical juncture (See: http://www.aporrea.org/actualidad/a47861.html).

II .- Have you taken stock of real socialism?

a crossroads, and so there are roads that should not be taken if they do not want to repeat mistakes that are already known in the experiences of the "actually existing socialism," especially since since Venezuela has not taken stock of inventory of the experience of transition to socialism of bureaucratic socialism, or as they like to call it, that would be the first concern. To what extent, in Venezuela, has been broken, from a standpoint of intellectual and political structure, balance and inventory of the experiences of real socialism? What conclusions emerge from this inventory balance for political practice?

III .- Many questions about the First Socialist Plan

I think there are multiple reference scripts present in the public policy of the Bolivarian revolution. In Venezuela we have achieved the Bolivarian Alternative Agenda meets all its objectives. But if we analyze the later plans, especially what we call the First Plan Socialist, the question we must ask is: To what extent the process popular, national, revolutionary has the effective capacity to achieve, realize the ambitions and aspirations there are contained? In what political conditions? In what institutional conditions? With what motive forces, leaders and national and international support? In what context of international forces? In what economic context? To avoid, from my point of view, a historical invariant, something that has happened repeatedly in the experience of real socialism: the issue of the "besieged fortress." Ie Does the Venezuelan revolution is going to constantly justify a debate marked by a transition to socialism in the context of becoming a "fortress besieged revolutionary?
We have for example a specific case: the Chilean case. A democratic, peaceful, legal, constitutional, democratic transition to socialism, which did not just among its strengths with those who assume everyone here we have: with the "base of support" of armed forces engaged in stabilization popular constituent process with the revolutionary process, but justamente ¿cuál fue el devenir y destino del caso Chileno a partir de las fricciones del campo político? No fue simplemente un “golpe seco y frío”. Nosotros pudimos observar en el caso chileno —que fue emblemático— cómo la fluidez e inestabilidad de las correlaciones de fuerzas en el parlamento chileno generaron una precondición para el golpe de estado de Pinochet. Es decir, el propio parlamento chileno le abrió la puerta al golpe militar. Y a veces nosotros perdemos de vista estos pequeños detalles históricos.


IV.- Hay un campo minado que debemos desarmar para el 2010

Eso lo digo a propósito de la prospectiva política inmediata para el año next. Sometimes we think that what is being discussed at this juncture and the present situation, the electoral law, elections this year, the coming elections, are mobilized as if the lane is the "rail revolution" was completely oiled. I think there are bumps in the road, there is a minefield that must disarm, and I think that is the task of intellectuals: to predict and analyze in detail the minefield.
geopolitically A field weakened by the U.S. administration and its allies, and geopolitically weakened by the Venezuelan right, which has been carving, weaving a support structure, in what they call "civil society organizations, they call it as "democratic society." They are assumed to be monopolists of "democratic society." Trying again to revitalize the so-called "transition programs," which called on the United States Office of democratic transition, with its "color revolutions."



V. - The opposition can expect to earn no less than 30 to 35% of the national parliament

I do not foresee a 2021 as it plans Luis Britto Garcia. I foresee a few years ahead in which they will try again to install a "democratic transition office in Venezuela, where the parliament is going to turn a fundamental "sounding board" for the Venezuelan right offensive, trying to capitalize on some political and institutional space they control. Try to build a 30 or 35% minimum space from a parliamentary coalition perfect enables them to control this area. Simultaneously trying to divide the social and political alliance that supports the Bolivarian Revolution (PPT, PCV, PSUV and social movements), trying to cause friction, trying to seduce some sectors of the revolutionary political alliance from Washington, to try to generate a scenario if not division, at least to weaken the forces supporting the revolution and growth and advance the right of the Venezuelan parliament.
So in that context is not 2021 but 2010 I pose what for me are fundamental challenges that we must address and include the relationship between democracy and transition to socialism.


VI .- Chávez has taken a political vacuum and if you keep doing this may cause problems

One of the comments made at the beginning is the theme of the "hyper-leadership." Others would have called the "progressive Bonapartism, dry cesarismoa others, some have confused the terminology of Gramsci on the progressive Caesarism with positivist reading Vallenilla Lanz on democratic Caesarism. Here we must remember that for Gramsci Caesarism background is a catastrophic equilibrium of forces in conflict, leading him to assume commitments to sectors not committed to the revolution to achieve comparative advantage in the balance of power. I think this scheme of power is a big mistake, and does not advance the revolution from the perspective of building an anti-democratic and socialist hegemony. What Gramsci basically arises at a time in which a collective political management structure is not well established, a "great personality" politics takes under his weight, the dialectics of revolution or the dialectic of the restoration. And I think Chavez has taken a political vacuum, a vacuum of political mediation and dialogue is important that if used can generate "own throat knives for the Bolivarian revolution": the indispensability of the Leader, the fragility of the revolutionary leadership. Here the "moment of the Leader" swallows the "time leading popular and organized," it must ensure the continuity of the constituent popular.
For tasks, functions, to advance the Bolivarian revolution requires a political structure, we call it, an intellectual collective, not only administrative and electoral structure, as has named Vladimir Acosta. Not only require individual intellectuals, notables and prominent personalities, it requires critical thinking organic to the revolutionary movement, requires a recovery of the link between socialism and democracy, that the ideological right has consistently tried to obscure, to generate a kind of dilemma which socialism is the "totalitarianism", and representative democracy is precisely the political model of the "end of history", the destination station and the last path left.


VII .- Rethinking the relationship between socialism and democracy

I think one of the fundamental tasks, whether by assigning tasks, is just back to rethink the relationship between socialism and democracy, overcoming the habits of thought that has left the Leninist script, the script's Bolshevik orthodoxy on a left that in Venezuela, has been stamped by the pregnancy, the role played by the influence of the Third International revolutionary socialism in Latin America and the role of the intelligentsia conveyed to the Third International, the model of socialist states, and Marxism-Leninism as a script, such as habits, reflecting conditioned to think and imagine the transition to socialism. Stalinism castrating played a role in shaping critical thinking and our American revolutionary.


VIII. Cuban and Venezuelan road to socialism via

I see with concern that in Venezuela there is no conclusive answer about the significance of national and specifies the path of the Bolivarian revolution, in relation to the Cuban experience. I see with surprise that the attitude is basically no difference defend, without qualification, the political future of the Cuban revolution without understanding the unique differences and characteristics of popular constituent process in each country. Each country follows a unique historical experience specific and builds his own way, but not copied or transplanted "models of socialism." Do not think it necessary that we load to the defense of the historical legacy of the Cuban revolution. We can support the experience, but that is a fundamental task that belongs to the Cuban people and their revolutionary currents, its failures or weaknesses should not become "handicaps" of the Venezuelan revolution.

IX. Capitalist sector grows but radical anti-capitalist discourse

I think that during the transition to socialism, as you said Victor Alvarez, is quite suggestive to think that while the economy strengthens still capitalist mixed sign, which strengthens private sector specific fractions, the presidential address speech poses a socialist radicalization. So how do you combine data on growth trends of the capitalist productive matrix radicalization presidential speech? How do we assimilate these two trends? What happens there?

X. We do not have a place to be discussed in depth the dilemmas of socialist construction

I think there is a second theme. About Eva Golinger a need to create centers of socialist thought, for example, I note with concern we do not have the structures of revolutionary thought, a balance sheet or inventory of all such theoretical discussions on the transition from the point of view of the socialist economy. Ie, where in Venezuela is discussed for example Oscar Lange, Kalecki? Where we discuss the debate Mandel, Bettelheim, on the law of value, on socialist accumulation, with Guevara in Cuba itself? Where is this discussion that to inform the movement, popular constituent power on the transit of "private ownership of the means of production" to the various forms of social property (distinguishing that "nationalization" is not "Socialization") and the dynamics of the market economy in socialist planning conditions? Where is discussing the issue of capital accumulation and socialism in Venezuela?


XI. Socialism and the relationship of forces

Samir Amin has recently written that the theme of transitions in the XXI century can not as easily seen as revolutionary thought in the minds of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Marx assumed, writing the Communist Manifesto, the revolution was pretty close, very close. The experience of 1871 made him think that it was so close and retreated into his cr {d ela political economy Notice bourgeois in the British Museum. Engels wrote a preface regarding the class struggle in France which presents a perspective shift from insurgency to gradual progress through a revolution of the majority, using the parliaments in the German social democracy. Then the same German Social Democratic Party-concentrated in the first world war and the approval of appropriations war shattered all the controversy in Europe about the possibility of a broad alliance of the forces of revolutionary socialism.
That ended in the divide between what was the Socialist International at the time and Leninist Third International. As revolutionary socialism we can see how Stalin participated in the "Third Period", in a wedge that deepened the split between social democrats and communists in the German party itself, which had expectations of continuing revolution. Stalin came to argue that the social democratic left was the worst of "social fascism," as he called it. Later it was trying to amend the so-called "popular fronts", but the Stalinist counter-revolution had already advanced. We also have the controversy, after the death of Lenin in relation to the succession in the Bolshevik party in relation to the different wings ideological, then we have the Sino-Soviet conflict, and stop counting. After Lenin's death, already foreshadowed despotic tendencies and counter-revolutionaries within the Bolshevik tradition.

words, the path of balance and inventory of real socialism, bureaucratic socialism is not simply an optimistic prophecy where we're going to fill with flowers by simple will or simple moralizing or a simple self-help psychology optimistic, but we face precisely the real difficulty of any transition to socialism based on the correlation of forces that are there. That is, where optimism depends not simple dreams but the composition of classes and the social composition of the struggles.


XII .- The different visions of the revolution

Here Roland Denis is telling us that the popular movement looks partially administered, where there is a sort of military republic, corporate, bureaucratic interpretation of Roland and at the same time, I hear voices saying that socialism walking rapidly toward the achievement of a just society of equality, freedom and justice. How can two people who inhabit the same social space, are so radically dissimilar perceptions of "process" part of left field?
So to me it seems important to reflect in depth on the transition to socialism. Lost for example, Samir Amin, when he says: Is it possible to keep the Soviet paradigm of development that initiated the welfare state or the national development of third-world countries, to maintain the illusion of the transitional post-capitalist? The answer it is not. He even says how to deal with three fundamental contradictions of capitalism in structural terms, not in terms of revolutionary government's revolutionary project or situation.

The first is the economic alignment, that is thinking about replacing a mounted company economy Private property and market on the commercial lineup that is still present worldwide. When he speaks for example of China: one country, two systems, which is not one country, two systems, but the expansion precisely regulated and controlled by state planning certainly the commercialization of large sectors of economic activity in China.

Secondly, Amir Samin presents us with what we going to do with the destruction of nature? To what extent our political projects and our public policies effectively address the criticism of the productivist and development to address, not rhetorically but in practical terms, the development issue sustainable growth and accumulation in conditions which ecology is saying that productivist, growth and accumulation are problematic?.



XIII .- The hyper-consumerism, the opposite of profiteering

Third and correlated with this second point, the issue of consumerism. I think that malls in Venezuela are emblematic reference pole face meetings conducted by the PSUV some Saturdays or Sundays. I have participated in the meetings of my battalion of the PSUV, but I'm surprised the attractiveness strikingly, mobilization of Shopping Centers, which is mobilizing against PSUV battalions today. I see the malls full of commercial reasonableness and desire. I see the commercial logic of alienation in a society in transition to socialism, working with all the ease of the world. I see no discussion on this point in the socialist battalions. So what to tell me what kind of world of flowers and angels are socialists? I think this is a capitalist consumer society, without a capitalist production structure that supports the needs and aspirations pattern induced by the culture industry, advertising and media.
And finally, to close, Samin Amin poses the issue of North-South uneven development. I think that Venezuela has a key role, with all the mistakes and successes, as the vanguard of globalization to reorganize the revolutionary left movements in the world. And I think Venezuela, provided that work has been spending forces to be deployed to the internal strengthening of the revolutionary process in a fundamental projection propaganda achievements of the Bolivarian revolution.


XIV .- The role of Venezuela and the intellectuals

is necessary, from my point of view, that Venezuela understands its role in the struggles of anti-globalization movements, the struggles of the South in relation to new multipolar integration schemes, but also humble regarding the presentation of their progress. Because if we make too much propaganda on the achievements of the revolution are not such, and becomes a crude balance, a stark inventory on the effective progress of the revolution in various fields, can be very bad. We may look bad, for example, the difficulty of effectively passing on the achievements of Barrio Adentro I to other levels of national public health system, such as public hospitals. We can look bad if we observe that most of the Mercal are not strengthened by the production or domestic supply but by the import dependency for food. We can be very bad if, as I said Victor Alvarez, analyze how fiscal and financial incentives are being capitalized by an emerging bourgeoisie or economic sectors that can do as one who turned around the table and had a face to Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías and another face to the opposition.


XV .- To be much less complacent at this time

revolution is, I think we have to be much less complacent at this time with the Bolivarian revolution and demand that the political leadership structure that does not turn intellectuals as history has been known to porters. If Romulo Betancourt said that the armed forces were bought with prostitutes and whiskey, I think he said and if it did not say a thought, that intellectuals are "cooked in its own juice." That is, Betancourt "beheaded" or neutralized in practice important fractions revolutionary intelligentsia: What made Betancourt's Democratic Action, which was brilliantly Machiavellian to prevent the very possibility of radical left? In this popular national revolutionary movement, if we do not see that what he did Betancourt, we will not see what you are trying to make right with the young Venezuelan.

XVI. Están recuperando el mito Betancourt como un liderazgo democrático alternativo

Para finalizar, solamente un detalle. Revisen en bibliotecas y librerías la gran ofensiva con relación a la mitología del “padre de la democracia”. Jóvenes repitiendo las consignas de Acción Democrática y volviendo a pensar que Rómulo Betancourt es el modelo a seguir como liderazgo. Jóvenes que se entrenan, que son pagados para ir a cursos internacionales y nacionales para recibir el guión del anticomunismo, elaborado justamente por esa bisagra que se conformó en el seno de un partido que también fue un partido nacionalista popular y revolucionario y que terminó siendo justamente the beachhead to prevent a social process in Venezuela. Do not forget, Betancourt defeated politically and militarily to the revolutionary left in Venezuela. And the left contributed many ideological and political errors. Among them, dogmatically assume Marxism-Leninism and neglecting the relationship between socialism and democracy.
jbiardeau@gmail.com



social networking